KIRAN CHANDRA BARMAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The controversy raised in this petition pertains to the appointment of a Head Master in the Sonapur Girls High School. The order bearing No. E-1/110/95/33127-32 Dated Guwahati the 16th Feb/95 issued by the Inspector of Schools, Kamrup District Circle, Guwahati reads as follows :

(2.) The appointment appears to be a stop gap arrangement allowing the incumbent i.e. the Respondent No. 4 the Head mistress of the School in addition to her own normal duties, grade and scale of pay until further orders or till the regular Headmistress is placed in the School, whichever is earlier, on the death of Smti Chandra Prava Saikia, former Head-Mistress by the above order the respondent No.4 was authorised to discharge financial matter as drawing and disbursing officer of the school. The petitioner being aggrieved by the above order moved this Court by way of this writ Petition as being arbitrary and capricious. The petitioner claimed his seniority on the basis of his lengh of service as an Assistant Teacher, according to the petitioner he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the year 1974 and in pursuance of the appoiintment letter he joined in Tihu High School as Assistant Teacher on 21.4.74 in graduate scale of pay. The petitioner thereafter served in the Dimoria High School to utmost satisfaction of all till 30.10.92 and vide order bearing memo No. 173-403 dt. 30.10.92 petitioner was transferred to Sonapur Girls High School in his own Grade and scale of pay against the newly sanctioned vacant science Graduate post with effect from the date of his joining, petitioner accordingly joined in the new place of posting i.e. Sonapur Girls High School on 2.11.92. While the petitioner was working as such, the Head Mistress of the said School Smti Chandra Prava Saikia died on 13.2.95. On the sudden death of Ms. Saikia, Head-Mistress Smti Rina Devi, respondent No. 4 has been allowed to officiate as Head-Mistress by the respondent No. 3 vide his order No.E- 1/110/35/33127-32 dated 16.2.95 inspite of the fact that the petitioner is senior to her. As indiicated earlier the above Repondent No.4 was appointed to officiate as a Head [Mistress by the Respondent No. 3. Hence the writ petition. Petitioner claims that be being the senior most amongst the graduate teacher of the School and also on the basis of the seniority he was entitled to be officiated to the higher post even as an adhoc measure. The Re- spondent No.3 filed affidavit on behalf of the respondents. Respondent No.4 also filed its affidavit . According to the Respondent No. 3 the Respondent No 4 was appointed on the basis of seniority in the school and that was only a stop gap arrangement. Respondents reiterated that the appointment of Head Mistress in the Sonapur Girls High School to be made appointed on the basis of selection by the State Selection Board. The district seniority list of teachers has notyet been maintained/prepared therfore the authority acted on the School seniority. The Respondent No.4 contested the case and submitted her affidavit. She also claimed that she is seniormost as well as founder Teacher of Sonapur Girls High School. She is also an M.A.

(3.) The respondents stated that since it is only an adhoc measure and the matter is yet to be resolved therefore question of interference from this Court does not arise. The appointment and promotion in provincialised school are regulated by the Assam Secondary Education/ (Provinci-alisation) Act. 1977. Mr. B.J. Talukdar the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the statutory provision of law and contended that as per the statutory rule more particularly in view of the provision of Rule 13 the petitioner ought to have given weightage in his seniority. Mr. Talukdar, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in continuous service since 1974 and he was transferred to a school on public interest. Transfer of a Govt. servant on public interest therefore cannot wipe away the past services of the petitioner. Mr. Talukdar the learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner is also a B.Ed degree holder therefore for overall consideration he was the most suitable persons for being pro-moted as a Head Master of a School.